Missing included attribute when using `useQuery` with Q('io.cozy.files').getById(id)

[zatteo]

With the following query Q('io.cozy.files').getById(id), we call the GET /files/:file-id route from cozy-stack.

This route return the following object :

{
  links: {...},
  data: {...},
  included: [{...}] // if id it is a directory, it contains the list of files and sub-directories inside (paginated 30 by 30)
}

However, when using useQuery, the included field is not returned. It is correctly returned when calling directly client.query.

[paultranvan]

Related to #1083
This is because the client.query returns the actual response from the backend, while useQuery return the value from the store, which does not support included at this moment (nor links).

[paultranvan]

From what I see :

• included is actually handled on the store side here , meaning the documents are in the store , in the documents slice.
• BUT, it is not handled on the query side, we only take the data part here , meaning the queries slice does not have any reference to the included docs in the documents slice.
• So we should probably add the included in the queries slice alongside the data object, and return it from the getQueriesFromState . But it raises questions about sift evaluation (and also how to deal with this included API on the pouch side, which does not currently exist)

If all of this is obscure to the reader, I kindly invite to read this: https://github.com/cozy/cozy-client/blob/master/docs/architecture.md#store

[Crash--]

The only way I see to be able to handle correctly included is to define the code needed to populate it, so we'll have to duplicate code between cozy-stack & cozy-client.

The good thing, is that, if we do that, sift evaluation but also pouch side will work.

For exemple, this is how cozy-stack populate included for GET /file/:fileID https://github.com/cozy/cozy-stack/blob/master/web/files/paginated.go#L166-L181

[paultranvan]

Yes, and I guess we could make this includedCode mango-compatible, e.g. { dirId: XXX } to get folder children

[paultranvan]

Note we could also avoid the included management by having a new route that only gets a directory content, like GET /files/folderContent/:id , so the result ends up in data